I suppose I should feel that fair's fair and join the bashing, because I got pretty incensed the past couple years at the neverending Bush-bashing, but only two out of 208 weeks have passed and it's way too soon to tell anything.

Still, some of us warned that Barack Obama was a political beginner who had never been personally tested since elementary school, and that his stint in Chicago politics made him at least insensitive to the violations of ethics, and quite possibly ethically challenged in his own right. It shouldn't surprise anybody that he's stumbling out of the gate.

You can stumble out the gate and still win the horse race. But right now my own personal "hope" is that Barack Obama doesn't screw things up so bad that a Republican president can't unscrew them in 2013.

It's amazing the media clogs the airwaves and gives a voice to the 90 pound weaklings who unanimously got kicked to the curb after screwing everything up. Losing by 50+ votes in the House is a big win for Republicans, after they did a serious gut-check and found they STRONGLY OBJECTED to 1% of the bill. Why if they're economic experts they didn't do anything the previous 8 years when they were in power is left unasked.

Why if they're economic experts they didn't do anything the previous 8 years when they were in power is left unasked.

You're obviously missing the point. The GOP got their ass kicked for doing the same thing that your beloved party is set on continuing now. Lets spend another $800 billion because we know how well the first $750 worked out.

I guess when you campaign on change people actually expect it and all your comrades are doing is providing more of the same.

But welcome back to the batters box garage. It sucks when the spotlight is on you and your fly's open ain't it?

When the unemployment rate passes 8% on its way to 10 or higher, and hyperinflation starts, I for one won't give a good goddamn who is currently in charge.

Our nation as a whole has lived beyond its means for 20-25 years, under both Democrat and GOP control, because people want to to be lied to. We wanted to believe that hard work, delayed gratification, saving for a rainy day, and living below your means were mere superstitions that magically disappeared because we wanted it to be so.

Bill Clinton had a few very rough years in office two before he found his feet (and before he lost his head). I don't know how anyone new jumps into being President without some major stumbles.

The problem here is that Obama doesn't have time to learn on the job, or at least he isn't perceived to have time. Washington is in crisis mode. The most foolish thing Obama has done so far is his encouragement of the stampede. The kind of "change" Obama supposedly stands for -- thoughtful, pragmatic, and honest -- turns out to be deferable. It's a crisis! There's no time to waste! Thinking will slow us down!

Contra to Garage, above, Obama's biggest problem is his friends, not his enemies.

HoosierObama doesn't need one vote in the House to do anything. It's never going to be a "loss" there. Why he wastes a second with them is beyond me. Republicans babbling incoherently and throwing a hissy fit shouldn't be termed an "embarrassment" or a "setback". Second of all, the TARP freebee to bankers has nothing to do with the Stimulus Bill.

Our nation as a whole has lived beyond its means for 20-25 years, under both Democrat and GOP control, because people want to to be lied to. We wanted to believe that hard work, delayed gratification, saving for a rainy day, and living below your means were mere superstitions that magically disappeared because we wanted it to be so.

How is it that so many people - especially the ones currently running the government - think you can borrow your way to prosperity? How could such a foolish notion become so powerful? From his statements yesterday, Obama fully believes it. Perhaps Orwell was right when he said, "Some ideas are so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them."

Obama doesn't need one vote in the House to do anything. It's never going to be a "loss" there. Why he wastes a second with them is beyond me.

He doesn't? You mean The One doesn't need Congress? He can just wave his staff and stuff happens?

Second of all, the TARP freebee to bankers has nothing to do with the Stimulus Bill.

Of course not but again, that misses the point. TARP was supposed to get the banks to start lending money, get credit flowing. It didn't. Why should we think that another $800 billion giveaway will do anything more than dig a deeper hole than we're already in?

As for babbling incoherently, Nancy's doing a good enough job on her own. He'll she's making Biden look like a genius.

He doesn't? You mean The One doesn't need Congress? He can just wave his staff and stuff happens?

No, he doesn't need one Republican vote in the House. Not one. There aren't enough of them to matter.

Of course not but again, that misses the point. TARP was supposed to get the banks to start lending money, get credit flowing. It didn't. Why should we think that another $800 billion giveaway will do anything more than dig a deeper hole than we're already in?

Giving money to failed banks was a stupid idea. I don't think anybody knows what if anything the stimulus will do, but for me it's much better spent here instead of the boondoggle projects in Iraq. All the billions on road and bridges in Iraq, most half built, or not built at all. For nothing. And not a peep from the suddenly fiscally restraint conservatives. What a crock of shit.

This seems to be the new meme for "Progressives." The problem is that the pork spending in this bill involves a lot more than 1%. For example, National Review has a list of things in it that add up to $242 Billion, which is about 25-28% of this thing, depending on the final numbers. Now, I realize that not everyone is going to see the items National Review is listing as "unnecessary" or "pork," but it certainly puts this theme of "1%" in perspective. There should be as little non-stimulative, pork-scented spending in this bill as humanly possible--of course, that presumes humanness.

Spending a borrowed trillion on government service programs is stupid and irresponsible and will lead to hyper-inflation (because it will be the only path other than insolvency.)

A borrowed trillion spent on investment projects (new battery technology, new nuclear plants, a new train network in the North East, wind energy technology, the energy grid, new electric car research labs in the universities) - such expenditures are good because they had the potential to be recouped - to radically alter and improve our economy in the future, and to create whole new revenue (export) streams as our developed technologies are sold to the world.

If we're going to spend $1T on government service programs, my suggestion is that we outsource those programs to the Germans. They are much better at running social programs than we are – they’ve done it longer and they’ve done it better - so we’d get the most service for our dollars – the most efficiency.

But if we want to spend the money on ourselves only, I think every dollar of the $1T should be spent on new technologies, because that is what we are good at - America is the world leader at innovation,.

Indeed. Remember how House Reps were resistant to the idea (even after McCain "suspended" his campaign to rush to DC and hammer out a deal)? And they were eventually guilted into passing this hurry-up piece of legislation poo? Yeah, glad to see folks coming around.

No, he doesn't need one Republican vote in the House. Not one. There aren't enough of them to matter.

You're right. But then again Obama must think that some kind of bi-partisan support is needed. Perhaps its because if the stimulus fails miserably it won't just have Democrat fingerprints all over it. Ever think of that?

Giving money to failed banks was a stupid idea. I don't think anybody knows what if anything the stimulus will do, but for me it's much better spent here instead of the boondoggle projects in Iraq.

It always comes back to Iraq. Well your boy is planning on spending more with one swift pen stroke than Iraq has cost in the last six years. Oh and maybe its no matter to you but I'd rather have more assurance than "I'm not sure how it will work" before putting the taxpayer in the whole for another $800 billion.

Quayle: Spending a borrowed trillion on government service programs is stupid...

A borrowed trillion spent on investment projects (new battery technology, new nuclear plants, a new train network in the North East, wind energy technology, the energy grid, new electric car research labs in the universities) - such expenditures are good...

I'm not convinced that "stimulus" is a good idea at all, but if they are truely investments fine, I'll get on board.

It wasn't rhetorical.Why do you think they don't just go full steam ahead and totally ignore the GOP?I'm flummoxed on that one myself.

Pogo, see my reply to garage. This 'stimulus bill' is just another shit sandwich dressed up with lettuce and tomato. If and more likely, when it proves to be a another waste of taxpayer dollars, Obama, Reid and Pelosi can always say it wasn't just their idea.

If they were so certain it would help they'd tell Boehner and company to go fuck themselves and just pass it and move on to the next item. But they won't because they need to cover thier ass.

Yes, he does keep throwing softballs to the opposition. He has no control of his party, or why would Pelosi have been allowed to write this risible bill, much less Republicans, who should be cowering at this point.

He has no executive experience whatever. In a way, this is a good thing; otherwise, some more clever leader would have pushed through an even worse bill under our noses. Our only chance for survival is the ineptitude and paralysis of a divided and incompetent government. As for 2012, I'll worry about tomorrow...tomorrow.

The crisis is a crisis of belief that we have a future recovery even possible. The President and the Congress should tell their media helpers to talk about positive economic news and make hopeful speeches about it themselves. The danger is loss of a confidence that recovery is coming.After 8 years of highlighting bad news and saying that Bush is an incompetent, they have forgotten how.

One more thing garage, Iraq is Obama's war now. I listened to him along with Botox Nancy and Whorehouse Harry whine for the last 2 years about the war and the need to end it NOW! Not next week, not next year not sixteen months later NOW! Remember not one more day, not one more dollar?

Or should we just consider Iraq like Gitmo, another promise like the checks in the mail?

A word for those who have never seen a One Party government. There will soon be 2 factions developing within the one party. The contest for influence over financial aspects of government spending and regulation ( picking private sector winners ) never ceases unless a police state emerges. We can expect 2 Dem factions to go after one another by assinating each other's reputations via financial scandle disclosures. Where are the once powerful Daschle, Panetta, Richardson, and Blago these days?

If Obama does not prove that he's up to the job, who will be surprised? Not those who recognized out that he had no executive experience, a very short legislative resume, and a nonspecific, aspirational campaign.

When the unemployment rate passes 8% on its way to 10 or higher, and hyperinflation starts, I for one won't give a good goddamn who is currently in charge.

Our nation as a whole has lived beyond its means for 20-25 years, under both Democrat and GOP control, because people want to to be lied to. We wanted to believe that hard work, delayed gratification, saving for a rainy day, and living below your means were mere superstitions that magically disappeared because we wanted it to be so.

We are so effing screwed.

Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes!

Larry J said...

How is it that so many people - especially the ones currently running the government - think you can borrow your way to prosperity? How could such a foolish notion become so powerful? From his statements yesterday, Obama fully believes it. Perhaps Orwell was right when he said, "Some ideas are so ridiculous that only an intellectual could believe them."

1. Power is a heady thing. It leaves fools believing that they can walk on water.

2. I suspect the more seasoned know you cannot borrow your way to properity but it is not in their self interest to tell the public to bite the bullet. First instinct is to survive and to promise sunshine and lollipops.

Pogo said...

Why do you think they don't just go full steam ahead and totally ignore the GOP?I'm flummoxed on that one myself.

Because when it fails they don't want to be the party holding the bag. They need R's to give some cover.

It is interesting that this meme of Obama failing already has taken hold so early. I note that the Gephardt comment was two years into the Bush (43) Presidency, and Daschle's was a month or so earlier. Obama is getting this within two weeks of taking office.

I think that part of it is that he is trying to panic Congress into passing a trillion or so dollar "stimulus" bill that arguably will do little to stimulate the economy in record time by claiming that the earth, as we know it, will end if Congress doesn't act IMMEDIATELY.

Obama pulled ahead of McCain when the later jumped into the bank bailout negotiations and tried to force things. Obama sat back, looked thoughtful and intelligent, and did essentially nothing. And that was when McCain's numbers started to free fall.

But now we see Obama trying to panic the American people. The problem is that the more light that gets shown on the "stimulus" bill, the worse it looks. Obama does calm well. He doesn't do frenzied well at all, and that is what we are seeing right now.

Country First John McCain's amendment to kill it was defeated. You have something against buying American?

Not me garage but President Obama seems to be backtracking off it as the linky I provided shows.

See the thing is, since Obama branded himself as THE ONE who will bring change to Washington, THE ONE who will no longer run things as 'business as usual' and all that crap, I'm actually going to hold him to it. Now if you want to accept it as the usual campaign rhetoric just say so I'll be cool with that.

The original point (since forgotten) is to keep the financial system running, to rescue it from a legal system that would paralyze the nation's capital for 50 years otherwise, in a wave of bankruptcies caused by bankrupcy proceedings tying up funds.

That part seems to be working. There's no new money out there yet.

The existing funds are going in a circle from Fed to banks back to Fed, as the Fed buys assets and the banks buy Treasuries with each cycle. The end result is that the legal toxic stuff is on the Fed's books and the nice clean Treasuries are on the banks' books.

The assumption is that the Fed can wait out the market and the banks can't.

Mission creep, piggybacking on the financial crisis, got into stimulating the economy. It's arguable that that's counterproductive and unnecessary in any case.

When the Fed stops trading pieces of paper and starts chasing real goods and services with its money, then inflation starts unless it soaks up the same money from taxpayers at the same time. That's the Dems' plan more or less.

The rescue of the banks didn't rescue the stockholders, by the way. They took their beating. Basically the buildings remain, and the creditors and depositors.

I don't know about setting salaries. I mean, I do. It's a bad idea. If the government wants to set salaries, let them buy more than 50% of the company and do it honestly.

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was more a consequence of the onset of the Great Depression than an initial cause. But while the tariff might not have caused the Depression, it certainly did not make it any better. It provoked a storm of foreign retaliatory measures and came to stand as a symbol of the "beggar-thy-neighbor" policies (policies designed to improve one's own lot at the expense of that of others) of the 1930s. Such policies contributed to a drastic decline in international trade. For example, U.S. imports from Europe declined from a 1929 high of $1,334 million to just $390 million in 1932, while U.S. exports to Europe fell from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade declined by some 66% between 1929 and 1934. More generally, Smoot-Hawley did nothing to foster trust and cooperation among nations in either the political or economic realm during a perilous era in international relations.

Pogo: "Why do you think they don't just go full steam ahead and totally ignore the GOP?I'm flummoxed on that one myself."

Remember all that "post-partisan" talk pre-election?

Now Obama waving his "I won" johnson at House Republicans, and his poaching a Republican Senator from a state with a Democratic Governor, counts as "post-partisan".

I guess that whole Bolshevik thing was post-partisan too, come to think of it.

(Not that I think Obama is a communist; he just got his community organizing mad skeelz from Communists. They'll be first against the wall when Obama needs to buy back some centrist cred. Of course, that's when I expect the dirt to really start flying....)

p.s. Dollars to donuts that after Judd Gregg resigns, but before he's confirmed, some nasty scandal rears it's ugly head, the nomination is withdrawn or fails, and Gregg ends up feeling like he's had a really bad day at the proctologist convention.

What did you say, Mark? Sure enough, Former Gregg staffer caught up in corruption probe. Two former staffers, actually, two separate little potential scandals. One has to do with the phone-jamming thing that happened up in NH back in 2002. The more interesting one, to me anyway, has to do with bribery: "Todd Boulanger, a former deputy to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff [, …] admitted he plied the staffer with front-row tickets to a hockey game, meals and drinks and other tickets to a baseball game, and in exchange received favors in spending legislation." If the legislation was written to please the bribed staffer, the Senator is implicated in, what would you call that, influence peddling. Linked by Instapundit.

Well Dasche may be miserable and may be a failure in this endeavor(being out over a hundred grand for jack squat). Now he is back to his multi-milliondollar coyote scam leading the dishonest to the promised land.

I'm yearning for the Obama that Independents, moderates and even some republicans dreamed he would be. I don't know why they thought he would be different, but for our sake I wish they'd been right about whatever it was they saw in him.

With his speech today he was his usual calm and cool self, but really, he may as well have been pounding his fists and stomping his feet like a 3 year old...we may never recover if the stimulus doesn't pass?? Never ever? Even the dimmest bulb has to chuckle a little at that.